Don’t let that knee jerk!
I want to get an early start on demonstrating the lack of political side taking that I will demonstrate and also hope you will be able to emulate, when that would help you, which is often, in our present times of unprecedented (at least in the past century) divisiveness.
For one thing, I need you to stretch a little and not automatically view the presently-posted criticism of current pronoun trends as “political.” Don’t let that knee jerk.
It’s a temptation, because almost all criticism of current “discursive trends” (how we talk, in this case, as regards pronouns) does, absolutely, come from a direction hostile toward “the left” — to conservative critics, the “woke.” Yes, pronoun criticism usually does show marked political animosity, if not a lot of critical thinking.
Making nice with Aristotle’s “mean“
That’s one thing that I believe marks my commentary as unique. I may bash pronoun abuse, but I’m not bashing lefties. I lean that way, myself, though always striving toward “Aristotle’s golden mean” (my Gram would smile; it’s her lesson!).
Of course, I have my inherent biases, and they have evolved as I have grown older and wiser, but I strive sincerely and determindly to find truth in both directions — and lies, too. Please don’t pick a side and now humor yourself that your choice is the “one” that operates on unbiased truth. That’s not very smart. I know you can do better.
So that’s another difference here that I hope you can emulate. Don’t “take sides blindly.” Strive to see the truth in both directions. As you develop this skill and proclivity, you will distinuish yourself as “one of the smart ones” — maybe a leader — not merely an overzealous follower. Yuck to that.
The overzealous can’t be trusted. I think there’s something about that in the Bible. They are trying too hard to win acceptance. Tomorrow, they might follow the exact opposite path — if that’s where they see their bread getting buttered, and with equal (over)zeal. To the one-sided viewer, it’s about the zeal, not the path. Make it about the path. See the truth (and the lies) in both directions, not just one.
How to break (out of) the ignorant cycle of hateful bias?
How? Here’s how: if you’re a Trumper, tell me the three biggest harms that he has caused to our nation and our world. Then, I’ll know your brain is not dulled by over-zealousness.
And, surprise! I’ll put that same test to the so-called “Woke“: Name for me me three places where the Clinton-Obama-Binden politics went wayyy too far, opening up our now-threatened democracy to what we presently have on our hands. Can you do it, Lefties?
I sure as hell can answer both questions, but, on this site, I will stick with the issues germane to my own education and career: communication and rhetoric, including writing. That’s why you’ll find me, here, ripping on the abject and unnecessary pronoun abuse now popular (in some places mandated, for God’s sake!) in our present times.
I will accord deep personal respect for just about anyone — righty or lefty. And if someone wants to deny whether they’re a he or a she (of any stripe), I’ll go out of my way to call them neither, out of respect.
But this guy you’re reading — me — with my background, is not going to defile my own heritage with the English language and call any one person a they. People with a good brain and a little help (available right here) have innumerable options, to show both respect and intelligence. I don’t want, need, nor like “political correctness,” but I’m “all over” the grammatical type.
Yes, I am hoping to help any reader – righty or lefty – who wants to better understand and utilize language. That’s what I love, and if you love it, too, we’re definite buds, in my book. I might critique your sentence structure, but I don’t care about your politics. Well, I do care, but it’s just not my focus.
I proudly offer rich expertise in the subjects I’ve studied and taught intensively, like writing, discourse, speaking, listening, and other topics in communication. But I’m neither a political scientist nor economist (nor, likely are YOU, I might point out), so I tend to keep my many (!) opinions on such topics on the private (not public) side. My friends get an earful. No harm there. As for you, the public, you shall be spared! Kinda.
Not the policies, but the “talk about“
So, when and where it comes to language and rhetoric, that is, how people (including politicians!) “talk” (whether speaking or writing) – that’s “fair game” for my crosshairs.
Love to do it. That’s my stuff. Not the policies (not trained in that), but the talk about the policies — that’s another “story” (no pun!).
Should we drop a bomb on X? Well, it’s never my first inclination (preferring diplomacy), but, truth be told, I really don’t know. I lack any and all training in political and international military matters. On the other hand, if person X says Y on Tuesday and Z on Friday — and acts like his stance never changed — that’s rhetoric, and I just might go there, if I think it matters and if I can pass my own test: can I share a perspective that’s not already being said — and plenty?
I do like to make original — not tired, worn-out– points, and I’m trying to inspire you to shoot for the same high standard.
So don’t expect to read anything here that you’ve already read elsewhere. I’m asking for – and striving to demonstrate – authenticity! You’ll know it when you read something that is NOT the same old stuff being said the same old way just about everywhere — and nowadays, maybe written by “the great homogenizer,” AI.
The right is not my enemy. The left is not my enemy. My enemy is people not speaking for themselves — and the worst case-scenario happens when an app does your talking for you. Just Say No (to that)!
Both sides, now
Truly, both “sides” (left and right) offer important insights into our social co-existence and, to my interests, human interaction – not just one side or the other. I want to extol and even model the ideal of finding validity in both directions. I’ve taught students of every political stripe, and I coached them all, with all my heart, to make their arguments strong, sturdy, and stylish. Same goes for you. That’s my bias: Authenticity — that is, say what hasn’t already been said — at least not your way.
But please do yourself (and the rest of the world) a favor and stop the mindless “sharing” of empty, severely biased, and logically bankrupt stupidity that would embarrass my grandma to know that you didn’t just delete, when it came your way. If you run across something that actually makes a point and then supports it with evidence and reasoning — more power to you. You may share it my way, whichever “side” it comes from. For reasoned and supported positions, I’m all ears.
Just don’t degrade yourself and your own heritage by mindlessly forwarding around empty “bumper stickers.” If you have something to say, say it in your own words. If that’s a challenge for you, then you’ve come to the right place. That’s not my political stance, that’s my communication stance.
I want to make a good role model — for you! If and when you’re not too pissed off by this or that unconventional view of mine, I hope you find refreshing my non-political basis for my viewpoint! Rhetorical, yes; political, no.